Jewish American Heritage Month

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

By Sunny Nwankwo, Aba

The Leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), in Australia has commended the people of Nigerians, (especially the Southeasterners) and its members across the globe for heeding to the sit-at-home order by the groups world leader; Nnamdi Kanu.

This is even as the group is insisting that nothing will stop them from their struggles in achieving a Sovereign State of Biafra and leaving Nigeria which they said their forefathers were conscripted to be part of by the colonists.

The group in a statement made available to The Nation on Saturday by the Head of Membership and Mobilisation of IPOB in Australia, Kennedy Ochi, stated that the compliance of the sit-at-home by Igbos and non-Igbos is an indication that the people of the region and indeed Nigerians in other parts of the country were already tired and miffed with the President Muhammadu Buharis led government.

The group while condemning what it described as senseless killing of innocent Southeastern youths by security personnel in the country alleged that it was a ploy and systematic efforts by the federal government to wipe away youths of the zone and to pave way for the eventual imposition of long awaited Caliphate on the people of Southeast, which the group said that IPOB would continue to resist.

A systematic genocide was meted out against the Igbos and till date, not even the Hague (The International Court of Justice) has deemed it fit to investigate what happened and why we are still agitating and crying for a sovereignty state of Biafra.

It is our wish to sound a warning to the Nigerian state government that it will never be business as usual. We are awake and ready to confront anything. The needful must be done and we must go back to the drawing board.

Go here to read the rest:

Diaspora IPOB group indicates readiness to leave Nigeria - The Nation Newspaper

Category: Diaspora | Comments Off on Diaspora IPOB group indicates readiness to leave Nigeria – The Nation Newspaper
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

The Nigerian film industry, fondly called Nollywood, became popular in the early 1990s, although with more negative attributes than positives. Over the years, the industry has attracted a lot of criticism.

Some critics believe that the industry is quantity driven, while shunning quality. Others slated the industry for its budget restrictions, weak plots and repetitive dialogue.

But the most alarming criticism was focused on fatigue caused by movie overproduction. This fatigue was created by profit-driven filmmakers who churn out cheap, rushed movies on the regular. This wasnt surprising given the fast growth of the industry. In the early 2000s, Nollywood went producing up to 50 films per week, with an annual total of over 2,500 movies.

This overproduction caused a saturation of the market and film professionals began to seek alternatives in order to produce quality films. Starting as early as 2006 the industry began to make movies with a new approach to everything. Films like The Amazing Grace, Ije and Through the Glass started a change in the diaspora. And on the home market, the new wave was domesticated with Kunle Afolayans The Figurine. Some filmmakers described this as their attempt to rescue the dying industry.

Filmmakers among them Afolayan, Chineze Anyaene, Obi Emelonye, Stephanie Linus, Jeta Amata and Mahmod Ali-Balogun began to adopt a different marketing strategy to amplify earnings. Previously, Nollywood was largely produced for the small screen and consumed mostly straight to video on VCD/DVD. The new marketing strategy took the consumption of Nollywood back to the cinema.

This marked a turning point for the industry.

In 2013 President Goodluck Jonathans administration launched a 3 billion naira fund named Project ACT Nollywood, to support filmmakers. The fund was to help with capacity building and training for actors and filmmakers. It was also a vehicle for the establishment of film distribution platforms. This rejuvenated the industry, attracting young professionals in droves.

Nollywoods transformation has since become huge, with films such as Kemi Adetibas The Wedding Party (2016) grossing record breaking figures at cinemas.

In my recent paper, I explore these seismic changes. I set out to answer what impact this revamping from producing straight to VCD/DVD films consumed mostly by the masses, to an elite-targeted theatre distribution has had on the industry.

Since 2010, some dramatic developments have changed the nature of Nollywood. They include an influx of professional filmmakers, the rise in international festival and cinema tours, international premieres, collaborations with multinational companies, Pan Africanism and distribution via multiplexes. In this time, a films release on VCD/DVD began to happen later in its life, effectively disenfranchising Nollywoods traditional mass-market consumer base.

The questions I was interested in answering were: was the industry professionalising in other words have Nollywoods film makers become more specialised in their art? And was it gentrifying? Gentrification refers to the renovation and transformation of a neighbourhood, previously occupied by the working class, to suit the tastes of middle and upper class. I use the word metaphorically to explore whether Nollywood increased in grandeur, appeal and acceptance among Nigerias upper class.

The ability of Nollywood filmmakers to receive specialised training and improved knowledge meant that filmmakers perception of film and the creative process changed. It led to a new outlook filmmakers became quality rather than quantity driven.

Budgets also got bigger. More money began circulating in the industry as corporate and institutional funders stepped in. Corporate funders became interested in the industry due to its increasing formalisation of practice and rising professionalism among practitioners. They also saw the potential of high profitability and return on investment. State and Federal governments are also showing increased interest in the industry.

The effects soon become apparent. Producers could now hire the best cast and crew. Nollywood films appeared more often at international film festivals. Filmmakers increasingly began to target the diaspora, as well as unlocking new strategies to garner international audiences. Overseas premiers became more common.

Media anthropologist Alessandro Jedlowski notes that targeting diaspora audiences was a way to overcome the fatigue in the industry which began to manifest from 2017. Entertaining the elite, diaspora and non-African audiences came with its own activities. They include the exposure of filmmakers through film schools, international workshops and personal developments, interaction with Nigerian filmmakers in the diaspora, as well as the exploitation of linkages and contacts.

But did this these transformations mean the gentrification of the industry?

The gentrification process generally increases cost of living as well as housing, forcing original residents of the neighbourhood to relocate to less expensive areas. This invariably leads to their displacement.

The use of gentrification as a metaphor is deliberate. I wanted to avoid exploring the rise in the cost of production as a result of the influx of new and wealthy film professionals. Or the displacement of filmmakers or audiences. Instead, I wanted to explore whether the acceptance of Nollywood among the upper class or elite had led to a loss of dominance among poor people.

I did not find any displacement of either filmmakers or audiences.

But I did find that Nollywood had moved to catering to upper classes as much as it catered for the masses.

I concluded that gentrification in Nollywood wouldnt lead to any permanent displacements as two disparate filmmaking models co-exist. If any, I anticipate a temporary displacement at the point of consumption. But, since films eventually end up on DVDs, audiences that have been displaced from consuming films distributed via the theatres will finally get to consume them when theyre released on DVD.

Nollywood currently has two broad business models one that has come to be called the Old Nollywood. And the other, New Nollywood.

While some have confused these to be classifications for films and filmmakers, in reality, they are both business choices available to the Nollywood filmmaker.

These models cater to different audiences while some filmmakers continue to explore and experiment with new distribution channels.

The interesting question is: can the changes be sustained?

At the University of Nigeria were trying to ensure that they are. Were doing this by guiding students to create authentic African stories. Chris Obi-Rapu, director of the classic film Living in Bondage (1992), maintains that story is the bedrock, the foundation of every film. A film created from a faulty foundation is doomed, no matter how large its budget is.

As one of the recurrent points of criticism against the industry, we are contributing to Nollywoods transformation by ensuring that future industry players and scriptwriters are equipped with creative ingenuities to conceive and produce screenplays which are authentically African, well researched and thoroughly entertaining.

Link:

Nollywood: how professionalism -- and a new elite audience -- is affecting it - The Conversation CA

Category: Diaspora | Comments Off on Nollywood: how professionalism — and a new elite audience — is affecting it – The Conversation CA
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

TORONTO -- A Jewish-owned Kensington Market business is speaking out after it was vandalized with anti-Semitic graffiti referencing the Holocaust in an attack that was recorded on the stores surveillance cameras.

Toronto Police have started an investigation into the attack, which occurred earlier this month, amid a marked rise in anti-Jewish attacks apparently driven by the pandemic and conflict in the Middle East echoing through Canadian streets.

It was extremely upsetting, Jeff Levy, owner of The Kensary cannabis dispensary on Kensington Avenue, told CTV News Toronto.

It was a brand new store, we just put a lot of work into it, and we had to immediately clean it up. It was a disgrace, Levy said.

Surveillance video shows what appears to be three people pulling out a can of spray paint and starting to write just after 10 p.m. on May 6.

The video shows an individual spraying a number of phrases across the store, before handing the paint to another person, while a third looks on.

The vandalism includes anti-Semitic phrases that make references to gas chambers.

We got there just before noon, and it was all over our store. The remarks about the gas chambers, the gas chamber morgue, things like that, on our windows, Levy said.

Neighbouring businesses were not targeted. Toronto Police confirmed an investigation was underway but didn't say whether any charges had been laid.

The TPS said in a report last month that the city saw a 51 per cent increase in reported hate crimes of all types in 2020. Among them, Jewish groups were the most targeted, at 34 per cent of all incidents, ahead of Black people, who were targeted 23 per cent of the time, and LGBTQ2S+, at 11 per cent.

Bnai Brith Canada, a Jewish human rights group, say their figures show a tremendous increase this month, a sign Jewish people in Canada could be facing increased targeting amid the violence in the Middle East.

This is very troubling. This has the Jewish community on edge across the country, Bnai Brith CEO Michael Mosty said. In the month of May, which is Jewish heritage month ironically, we have seen more acts of violence nationally than we did for all of 2020.

Toronto City Councillor Michael Layton, whose ward includes Kensington Market, said the incident needs to be called out.

It has no place in our society, in our country, and we need to get past this, he said.

As for Levy, the graffiti comes less than a year after he received a threatening letter personally.

Its a huge concern now, he said. I dont want to leave my kids in this environment. Its extremely escalated and its very upsetting for us.

Link:

'It was extremely upsetting': Jewish-owned business targeted with anti-Semitic graffiti - CTV Toronto

Category: Jewish Heritage Month | Comments Off on ‘It was extremely upsetting’: Jewish-owned business targeted with anti-Semitic graffiti – CTV Toronto
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

The recent 11-day Israel-Hamas conflict has encouraged some journalists, foreign policy elites, academics and retired diplomats to flag Indias candidacy as a possible mediator. They suggest that as a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause for nearly a century, India has impeccable credentials, and its close relations with Israel and the Palestinians since the 1990s give it both an opportunity and leverage. It is also claimed that the resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not only essential for peace in West Asia but would also serve Indias interests.

Though interesting, closer scrutiny would expose Indias feet of clay. For one, while in the past, India played an important role in mitigating various conflicting situations such as the Korean war or during the Suez Canal crisis, both in the 1950s, one cannot ignore two notable flipsides. New Delhis response to the crises in Hungary (1956) and Czechoslovakia (1966) was a betrayal of the people of these countries and considerably dented Indias non-aligned credentials. Moreover, its diplomatic influences were buried in the Himalayas in 1962. Three decades of hard work and economic ascendance were necessary to hear Indian voices again. When it comes to mediating international crises, Indias track record is a mixed bag.

Also Read | India defends decision to abstain during UNHRC vote on Israel-Hamas conflict

Two, in recent decades, India has been unwilling or unable to be effective in resolving some of the conflicts in its immediate neighbourhood. It was not a visible and effective player during the crises in Sri Lanka (especially in the post-conflict stage) and Afghanistan (where its ability to shape developments is limited). It is struggling with the military-democratic resistance conflict in Myanmar, and is seen as a less-than-credible mediator in Bangladesh or Nepal, If this is the extent of Indias diplomatic leverage in South Asia, what will its influence in the ever-turbulent West Asia be?

Three, any Indian peacemaking efforts in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be an open invitation for third-party involvement in the Kashmir issue. For long, Pakistan has been clamouring for external mediation, and at different times, several countries and regional organisations have expressed a desire to mediate between India and Pakistan. If India were to involve itself in resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, countries such as Turkey will make similar moves on Kashmir. Unless it is ready to open a Pandoras box on Kashmir, India should not consider offering its good offices to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Four, one has to recognise the harsh reality. Every teacher is not a Confucius and every adviser is not Chanakya. Peacemaking needs abiding interest, nuanced skills and above all, domain expertise. These credentials are not easily found in the current structure of the Indian civil service. Since Independence, the bureaucracy is meant to create and promote the generalists, and an average Indian diplomat holds a dozen positions during his/her career and becomes an expert on all these issues and regions. There are exceptions, and some develop domain expertise, especially on the Arab-Israeli conflict, as a post-retirement passion, but their number is minuscule.

Indeed, in 2005, former Indian diplomat Chinmaya Gharekhan was named a special envoy for the Middle East. For long, the United States (US) had such a position, and gradually Russia, the European Union and China followed this practice. India sought to imitate this but without any clear mandate, agenda or even designation. Initially, Gharekhan was Special Envoy for West Asia and the Middle East Peace Process, and his designation changed to Prime Minister (PM)s Special Envoy for the region. The non-seriousness of this move became clear when the position was allowed to lapse in 2009 as Manmohan Singh formed his second government. No one ever talked of a special envoy for the region since then.

Five, claims that India has good relations with both parties are true but misleading. From the information currently available in the public domain, India does not engage with, let alone recognise, Hamas, the militant Palestinian group which controls the Gaza Strip. The recent conflict highlighted the growing influence of Hamas, and no effective peacemaking effort will be possible without India establishing a modus vivendi with Hamas. In recent years, both Russia and China have engaged with Hamas and even hosted its leaders. There are no indications that the ministry of external affairs is considering this option and engaging with Hamas without alienating Israel and Palestinian National Authority (PNA) will not be easy either.

Six, the continuing gap between Israel and the Palestinians is not due to the want of efforts by various players, especially the US. For various reasons, both sides believe that time is on their side and are not ready to make the necessary changes to reach an agreement. Conflict resolution does not appear to be their priority, and no external pressures or inducement will make them reach an agreement. In short, while others can facilitate, only the parties concerned can reach an agreement, and today there are no signs of this. If the failures of so many proposals are an indication, third-party involvement mostly complicates the problem.

Seven, while having relations with both parties is critical, there are scores of countries that maintain formal ties with Israel and the Palestinian Authority. For example, if the Emirates has relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia is inclined towards normalisation. Both these countries have greater political and economic clout than India and are better placed to financially support any Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement. Talking to both sides is not a sufficient condition for an active Indian engagement in conflict resolution.

Above all, active Indian involvement in mediation or facilitation efforts will have to be led by the prime minister (PM) himself and cannot be done by lesser figures in the government or bureaucrats. Though he has met the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, and PM Narendra Modis chemistry might help entangle some bilateral knots, he still lacks the leverage to influence the domestic policies of his interlocutors towards peace. With the pandemic response shaping his political future, mediating the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should be the last thing PM Modi should be concerned with.

PR Kumaraswamy teaches contemporary Middle East at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi

The views expressed are personal

The rest is here:

On Israel-Palestine, resist the temptation to mediate - Hindustan Times

Category: Palestine | Comments Off on On Israel-Palestine, resist the temptation to mediate – Hindustan Times
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

Radicalism is nothing more than understanding the root of a problem. Time and again, the late Palestinian and American thinker Edward Said struck at the self-deceptions, the shortcomings, and the prejudices underlying U.S. foreign policy. Throughout the 1990swhen the end of history seemed at hand, to be ushered in by a global peace brokered by U.S. supremacySaid forewarned of the charade of the U.S. peace process in the Middle East. He despaired toward the end of his life of any change in the Palestinians disastrous position, whose leadership had signed away any gains made in the national struggle for self-determination with the Oslo Accords, which he called an instrument of Palestinian surrender, a Palestinian Versailles.

Recent events in Palestine and Israel have shown Said was one of the few people to frame this issue properly. The U.S. media is beginning to catch up with his positions, which were considered radical in his own time, mostly because of the deep sense of history his writings evinced. The change has been led by the conversion of American liberals like Peter Beinart, whose recent articles supporting the rights of Palestinians in Jewish Currents earned him a profile in the New Yorker. But the U.S. establishment is rarely willing to consider the idea that the Palestinian national liberation strugglein so far as it had any hope of leading to a two-state solutionended with U.S. brokered talks in the 1990s rather than began with them. This 30-year lag has done great damage to U.S. foreign policy in the region as well as American national politics.

The conflict in Palestine is as much a war of images and ideas as it is a question of policy, as Said clearly understood. For a couple decades, Said was the most influential spokesperson for the Palestinians in the United Statesa lonely and courageous position at a time when using the word Palestine was considered a political provocation. The U.S. publics complacency is one of the greatest aids to Israeli influence over U.S. policyand it was here that Saids eloquence struck its greatest triumph, with even the American Israel Public Affairs Committee warning its supporters that challenging him will only make you look bad. Today, Israels leaders can no longer take public complaisance or, as Said put it, the near-total triumph for Zionism in U.S. public and political discourse for granted. There should be no doubt this is largely the legacy of Edward Said.

Said was a political activist, scholar, memoirist, and literary and musical critic. Every U.S. humanities student in the past few decades has dealt with his legacy. Saids book Orientalism prepared the way for a revolution in the study of literature, history, and politics. This unexpected, scholarly bestseller showed the European humanitieswhether it is the writing of a novel or the study of foreign languagesplayed a role in advancing the injustices of global imperialism. In Places of Mind: A Life of Edward Saidthe first major biography of the iconic thinker since his death in 2003author Timothy Brennan said Said used writing Orientalism to come to grips with the iniquitous portrayal of Palestine in the U.S. media. Said ended up going further into the history of Western literary and colonialist discourse to understand how modern pundits could so grossly subsume events like the ethnic cleansing of Palestine in 1948 or Israels discriminatory state within the meretricious rubric of the Middle Eastern conflict.

Saids political work, Brennan explained, found its basis in literary criticism. This is quite literally true: Said parsed, edited, and helped to translate several texts of the Palestinian movement in the 1970s and 1980s, including nationalist leader Yasser Arafats first address before the United Nations. Saids role in this movement also mediated his study of modern literary theory. He ended by being an inveterate anti-colonial thinker rather than a scholastic of post-colonialisms trivialities. (I dont think the post applies at all, Said once told a colleague.) This is what allowed Said to carry on his fight against the shabby canards of the U.S. foreign-policy establishment, chief among them the Middle East peace process.

Said should be remembered as a thinker of U.S. foreign affairs alongside his achievements as a literary scholar and representative of the Palestinian movement. This is a claim Brennan approaches but falls short of stating flatly. With startling aplomb, Said rejected the 1993 Oslo Accords and the Middle East peace process that followed, which was one of the principle theaters of U.S. diplomacy in the pre-9/11 belle poque. The essays and interviews he gave in the following years would fill five volumes and represented some of his strongest, most lasting, and most clairvoyant writings.

Said described the protests, strikes, and boycotts of the First Intifada in the late 1980s as surely the most impressive and disciplined anti-colonial insurrection in this century. Instead of building on it, he felt Arafat signed away any gains in the nationalist cause for the U.S. governments flimsy promises of being an honest broker. It was, he repeated over the next few years, the only time an occupied people had agreed to negotiate with their occupiers before a withdrawal had happened or been agreed on.

Said believed the purpose of peace negotiations was to provide Israel with securitynot to give Palestinians a state within the so-called Green Lines. This position caused a bitter rift between Said and Arafat, but others within the Palestinian leadershipamong them politician and writer Hanan Ashrawicame around to agreeing with much of his position. Over the next decade, Said kept up a frantic pace of writings as the extent of the Palestinian defeat grew.

The root of the problem was the U.S. governmentthe big white father, Said caustically called itnever treated the Palestinians as equals to the Israelis; this is not merely a moral question but an inadequacy of U.S. diplomacy that foreclosed any agreement. The Declaration of Principlesthe document known as the Oslo Accordsdoesnt make a single reference to a Palestinian state, self-determination, or sovereignty but provides for a kind of municipal self-rule (as Said termed it) without committing to ending the Israeli occupation of the West Bank or Gaza. (Here it only commits to limited Israeli redeployments.) Some people hoped Arafat could build on this in the fabled final status negotiations the agreement promised. Instead, the United States pursued a so-called incremental approach that was largely driven by Israeli demands for further Palestinian concessions but did nothing to stop the expansion of Jewish settlements that had already made a two-state solution almost impossible.

Does this mean ominously that the interim stage may be, in effect, the final one too? Said asked. It was almost bound to be so, as Said understood the politics of power behind it. The year after his death, Clayton Swishers The Truth About Camp David: The Untold Story About the Collapse of the Middle East Peace Process was published. This book should be a classic study of U.S. diplomacys historic failures and its lawyering for Israel. Yet the expectation persists that Palestinians should be content with less than what other national groups have accepted (an as-if state, Israeli writer David Grossman called it, without full sovereignty over its water, airspace, or land). Former U.S. President Donald Trumps peace planwhich the current administration has declined to disown so farshowed Israel doesnt want any two-state solution but further Palestinian surrender.

Brennan said Said reserved his greatest wrath for Middle East pundits as a writer. The fatuous solemnity with which the U.S. establishment greeted Trumps Abraham Accords recalled Saids characterization of former President Bill Clintons White House in his essay, The Morning After, when the U.S. president appeared like a 20th-century Roman emperor imposing peace on vassal kings during the handshake between Arafat and then-Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Of course, this was all theater and nothing but further Arab capitulationas were the Abraham Accords that recognized normalization between Israel and several Arab states it had, for the most part, long-standing ties.

U.S. diplomats speak as if the two-state solution was possible or only a matter of resuming talks. Indeed, the canard of the two-state solution was used to justify the Abraham Accords, which had nothing to do with bringing about Palestinian rights. From the 1990s, Said foresaw how the U.S. peace process prevented anything but a single-state reality. As Brennan said, Said consistently outpaced think tank intellectuals in Washington.

This isnt to say Said was an oracle of the current situation in Palestine or the region. Indeed, Brennan chronicled his shaky debut in Arab politics in letters during his time living in 1970s Beirut. But it was Saids unusual, almost outsiders approach to understanding the Middle East that supplied him with an independence of thought where others clung to political orthodoxies. An American professor of English literature at Columbia University, Said was always on the margins of Arafats movement as he felt he was on the margins of the U.S. establishment because he was born an Arab and a Palestinian.

Saids positions on Palestinian affairs were heretical as often as they were orthodox, viewed from within the nationalist movement. Beginning with The Question of Palestinethe book that followed OrientalismSaid saw tactically ahead to the concessions the Palestinian struggle would have to make. Principally, this meant finding a way to share the land of Palestine. This consistent belief in equal rights drove Said toward a two-state solution that would leave most of historical Palestine to the Jewish statea position later supported by Arafats group.

Toward the end of his life, it was the same belief in equal rights that convinced Said of a single-state solutionwhatever federal, binational, or other constitutional form this would take. Recently, this rights-based approach has gained more attention following major reports from the Israeli group BTselem and Human Rights Watch concluding Israel is practicing apartheid against the Palestinians.

Said was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, though he thought much of its influence on U.S. policy disastrous, according to Brennan. This establishment bayed at Trumps alleged betrayals of U.S. foreign policy and values. Then, there was the sense of relief, even exuberance, when Trump struck Syria.

Trump was the summum of U.S.-Middle Eastern doublespeakhe merely pulled away the curtain. The U.S. Senate unanimously passed a resolution that endorsed Trump moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem and celebrated the 50th anniversary of [Israels] reunification of the holy city. This was referring to Israels conquest of East Jerusalem in the 1967 Six-Day War, which flatly ignored how international law considers it occupied territory. The resolution also called for the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations without preconditions and reaffirmed U.S. policy that the permanent status of Jerusalem remains a matter to be decided between the parties through final status negotiations towards a two-state solution. None of this makes sense. Besides, whats there left to negotiate?

The resolution was a mangling of language that reflected long-standing U.S. practices. The silence and the wanton murder of language evident in the phrase peace process, Said recorded, are central to the Israeli (and American) project. Among other examples, Said was referring to Washingtons misrepresentations of the Israeli state throughout the 1990s. This included Warren Christopher, former U.S. secretary of state whose signature was scrawled across the Oslo Accords and who refused during his confirmation hearings to characterize Israels military control of the Palestinian territories as an occupation. His departments deputy press secretary, when asked for a clear statement of policy on settlements, delivered an incoherent answer that deferred the issue to final status talks. There is a causal relationship, Said concluded, between this sort of talk and Israels emboldened land expropriation.

This habitual misuse of the English language in the peace process did enormous damage to U.S. politics. After 9/11, it began to manifest itself in many ways. Said described the Patriot Act passed in October 2001 as an Israelization of U.S. policy. He had forewarned the terrorism craze is dangerous because it consolidates the immense, unrestrained pseudo-patriotic narcissism we are nourishing. This could very well characterize the present Republican Party, but its worth recalling Said was speaking of a Democratic president, Clinton. There is a straight line from the camouflaged falsehoods of the peace process to those of the war on terror, the pro-democracy invasion of Iraq (pushed by U.S. liberals like Beinart), Trumps embrace of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and what now appears to be a discredited U.S. political establishment.

Many American liberals have taken shelter in the notion that a right-wing Israeli government is the problem. Netanyahu isnt the root of the problem, the ideas he represents are. A large part of The Question of Palestine is given over to explaining the beginnings of Zionism in 19th-century European colonialism as well as how the massive architectural, demographic, and political metamorphosis of Palestine first took place as a projection in the writings of early Zionist thinkers like Theodor Herzl. The idea of a land without people for a people without a land was not incidentally tied up with Victorian ideas of using Biblical scholarship to prove the inferiority of the present inhabitants of Arab lands. In modern times, Israeli prime ministers since Menachem Begin have referred to the West Bank as Judea and Samaria, leading up to the real possibility of annexationwhich former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, Danny Danon, insisted wasnt annexation at all because Israels historical claim to this territory dates back over three millennia.

In the past month, any television watcher will have seen the U.S. media increasingly does permit Palestinians to tell their story (though its important to keep in mind the tendentious clichs of terrorism in the 1990s or Islam in the early 2000s set a low bar for accommodating the Arab perspective in American discourse). This was a problem Said laid out in his magisterial essay Permission to Narrate. Israel and its supporters worked to deny Palestinians the right to narrate their experience. The absence of a Palestinian narrative, by extension, meant there was no need to acknowledge a Palestinian people, Palestinian history, or Palestinian right to self-determination within a homeland.

Facts do not at all speak for themselves, Said reflected, but require a socially acceptable narrative to absorb, sustain, and circulate them. As has been remarked on elsewhere, the United States reckoning with its history of racism has accelerated a cultural shift that is exposing the inadequacies of the United States representation of Palestine. At last, it seems, society might have a socially acceptable narrative to tell the story of Palestinians alongside that of Israelis, Jewish Americans, Arab Americans, Black Americans, and others. Surveying Saids legacy within the American university system, Brennan said Said opened the door to a new generation of Middle Eastern, African, and Asian scholars. Without this sea change of the American upper-middle class, its difficult to imagine U.S. Rep. Rashida Tlaibsporting a keffiyeh no lessdenouncing U.S. support for Israels apartheid government from the floor of Congress.

A graduate student of Saids at Columbia University, Brennan deftly traced his former mentors maneuvering through the American academy, but he stumbled with Middle Eastern politics. Brennan seemed to give more credit than due to Said as an important go-between for Arafats Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and the U.S. State Department. Instances like Saids invitation to consult with the Reagan administration over the Palestinian problem were often measures of how the United States refused to take the Palestinians seriously rather than their esteem for Saids political influence with PLO leadership; wherever they happened to be in exile, Israel preferred Washington not deal directly with them. Brennan also refrained from a serious critique of Saids views on Arab politics and lettersor his dislike of Beiruts intellectual lifeeven when these views carried the imprint of personal grievances or his migr life in the United States.

In his own time, many of Saids most virulent critics came from the American liberal establishment like the New Republic, where U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken got his start as a reporter in the 1980s and where Beinart later preached liberal Zionism before his recent crisis of faith. Today, the New Republic runs columns excoriating the White House for ignoring the Palestinian struggle. But Beinarts conversion or Tlaibs speech in Congress shouldnt give the illusion of any impending and dramatic shift in U.S. support for Israel, which has the rare distinction of general bipartisan consensus in Washington.

As Said and other scholars of his generation argued, some ideas are invested with authority or legitimacy only because of the discourses of power that evince them. Of and in itself, the peace process has ceased to mean very much. But the U.S. State Department is still peddling bilateral negotiations, a two-state solution, and almost always leading with Israels right to defense while sagely forewarning that the present moment isnt quite right for a final settlement of the conflict. The White House is seeking to manage (the key word of the moment, according to former U.S. peace processer Martin Indyk) a deeply historical war with temporary cease-fires. Said took aim at this disregard for history with his critiques of U.S. media, foreign policy, and national politicsand it was this sensitivity toward the ineluctable inventory of history that made his criticisms so very convincing.

History has no mercy, Said wrote in The End of the Peace Process: Oslo and After. There are no laws in it against suffering and cruelty, no internal balance that restores a people much sinned against to their rightful place in the world. This shouldnt be misread as a message of hopelessness. Said as a writer wasnt a sentimentalist but followed the Italian thinker Antonio Gramscis maxim: Pessimism of the intellect, optimism of the will. Today, there isnt much left to do but parse Saids writings on the so-called peace process and ask what can be done differently.

Read this article:

Edward Said Saw the Future of Israel and Palestine - Foreign Policy

Category: Palestine | Comments Off on Edward Said Saw the Future of Israel and Palestine – Foreign Policy
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

The recent escalation of the conflict in Palestine has emphasised the multiple paradoxes in the decades-long political stalemate in the Middle East, which is unique in the amount and extent of suffering heaped on its peoples. Notable also are the paradoxical levels of external complicity and indifference.

Influential foreign actors assist the perpetrators of atrocities but pay little attention to the mounting numbers of victims, except when they turn up as refugees at their doorstep. They do not care when Palestinians and Syrians are thrown out of their homes or bombed into oblivion, packed into a no-mans land. But they rise up in unison when the perpetrators are threatened.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the circumstances surrounding the obscene legal travesty of the double dispossession the Palestinians of Jerusalems Sheikh Jarrah neighbourhood. Already driven out of their homes as Israel came into existence in 1948 and prevented from ever reclaiming their original homes, they are about to be turned into refugees again on the pretext that the homes they have lived in for decades legally belong to Jewish settlers, according to the rigged Israeli judiciary system.

Protests against this brutal dispossession have been ignored for years and it was only when Hamas fighters started launching rockets at Israeli cities that Israel, and the rest of the world, stood up and listened.

This is the abiding paradox of the current international system, which champions peace and justice but only listens to those who have guns. When the United Nations was set up in 1945, its guiding principle had been to contain war and violence in general and mass atrocities in particular. Haunted by international inaction in the face of the Holocaust, the UN hastened to adopt the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

The UN Charter provided for peacekeeping and armed intervention against aggressors principles that were implemented, significantly, first in Palestine a couple of weeks after the establishment of Israel and later on the Korean Peninsula, in Lebanon, Cyprus, etc. However, with the paralysis of the UN during the Cold War and the rather disappointing outcomes of interventions, the push for such action was weakened.

The post-Cold War proliferation of atrocities and acts of genocide (in Rwanda, Bosnia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan, etc) provoked a lot of clamouring for active intervention to stop such mass violence.

Spurred both by a rise in atrocities and the partial success of interventions in Iraqi Kurdistan (1991), Somalia (1992), Haiti (1994), Bosnia (1992-1995), Kosovo, Sierra Leone, and East Timor (1999), the debate gained momentum. In 1998, the Rome Statute was adopted, establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

In 2001, former Australian foreign minister Gareth Evans, Special Advisor to the UN Secretary-General Mohamed Sahnoun and their colleagues in the Canadian-sponsored International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) published the landmark report The Responsibility to Protect.

The commission was in turn inspired by a 1996 book titled Sovereignty as Responsibility: Conflict Management in Africa, produced by the Brookings Institution and edited by the veteran Sudanese diplomat Francis Deng, arguing that state sovereignty should be conditional on fulfilling obligations of human rights protection.

The ICISS report, with its rather ambitious subtitle: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All, reiterated the slowly evolving consensus that it was no longer acceptable to stand by and watch atrocities being televised live in this era of global media.

It advocated the responsibility to protect doctrine (R2P) that affirmed the responsibility of the wider international community for taking timely and decisive measures to protect endangered civilians when their state bearer of the primary responsibility for protecting its citizens is found manifestly failing to fulfil its duty. Appropriate and proportionate coercive measures, properly authorised by the UN, can then be taken as a last resort.

The R2P doctrine was formally adopted by the UN General Assembly at the 2005 World Summit. The unanimous adoption meant that Israel also endorsed it, as did many Arab countries, like Sudan, which later became a main target of the doctrine.

Nevertheless, the evolving fragile consensus around R2P continued to wobble. Divisions over the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq were a key factor, given the prominence of the US and the UK as R2P advocates.

Some saw the doctrine as fundamentally flawed, even disingenuous, a combination of resurgent imperialism and the war on terror or as an attempt to sell militarism and neo-colonialism as humanitarianism.

By its very nature, the doctrine appeared wilfully selective, never being applied to the powerful states. Its moralist language was depicted as nave, condescending, and so permissive as to justify intervention at the slightest pretext.

From the other side, some advocates decried the watering down of the doctrine to appease the sceptics, leading to the loss of its original ethos of urgency and non-consensual military intervention. This signalled a return to normal UN and international practices of fitful and selective, patchy and piecemeal interventions.

Regardless of mounting scepticism, the doctrine continued to enjoy support and was invoked formally in the NATO-led intervention in Libya in 2011.

These developments, especially the NATO military campaign in Libya, provoked some negative reactions, in particular from Russia and China, while the ICCs indictment of some African leaders, including Omar al-Bashir of Sudan, also brought resistance from African and Arab countries.

However, in spite of Arab and African solidarity with al-Bashir, Arab and African countries have endorsed the Palestinian Authoritys decision to join the ICC in April 2015. The courts affirmation that crimes in Palestine fall under its jurisdiction issued in February this year was also widely welcomed. During the assault on Gaza in May, ICC prosecutors announced that they would be monitoring the conflict for possible war crime charges.

It is a supreme irony that the most ardent proponents of the responsibility to protect and the ICC, in particular Western democracies, have been very hostile to applying the doctrine in Palestine. This vocal opposition is an admission that serious crimes are being committed. In an interesting role reversal, arch-liberals who have always defended justice are practically advocating impunity for perpetrators of some of the most heinous crimes in the book, while former sceptics have now converted to the ICC.

Being lukewarm towards humanitarianism was the signature of the Trump era and the rise of pathological populism in Europe and the Americas. These trends have not only advocated turning a blind eye to atrocities abroad, but even presented tyrants like Russias Vladimir Putin and Egypts Abdelfattah el-Sisi as role models. They negatively impacted human rights in established democracies and more so in relatively fragile ones in Eastern Europe, Asia, Latin America, etc.

Given that left-wing populists have also been among the leading critics of R2P as imperialism in disguise, this has significantly narrowed the scope of support for genuine humanitarianism. However, there are signs of a revival of humanitarianism and human rights advocacy, strengthened by the surge in principled activism among the youth all over the world. It is that surge which carried President Joe Biden to power in the US and is now pushing Western governments to change their stance on Palestinian rights.

The international reaction to the war in Gaza is a positive sign of a major shift back to active humanitarianism. Palestine could become a focal point in this resurgence. A number of considerations favour the application of R2P in Palestine.

First, Israel is the first state that had been created by a UN resolution. Its refusal to adhere to the terms of that resolution undermines its own legitimacy. More to the point, the UN is directly responsible for the suffering and dispossession of the victims of that decision. The UN and the international community must account for those sins and act to stop the current robbery in progress. This is aside, of course, from the specific responsibility of major international actors for more substantive moral, political, financial and military complicity in these crimes.

Second, even from the Israeli perspective, applying R2P to Palestine should be desirable. The whole rationale for a Jewish state is to offer a refuge for a category of people who had suffered persecution and enmity. It would be incongruous and morally perverse if the state that is supposed to protect against atrocities indulges in an abundance of atrocities, dangerously resembling the fascist entity from which many of its citizens sought refuge. A repressive state is not an ideal refuge for anyone.

In any case, a state does not exist or function in a void. Its very existence depends on a mutually supportive network of states sharing values of mutual protection. The survival of any state depends on the good will of others, especially its neighbours. A state where key politicians and a majority of citizens reveal patterns of cruelty, chauvinism and ugly self-centredness, paints itself as a villain. And we know what fate most narratives reserve for villains.

If brute force is what protects communities and states, Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union would still be here. They are not.

The views expressed in this article are the authors own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeeras editorial stance.

Go here to read the rest:

Palestine and the UNs responsibility to protect doctrine - Al Jazeera English

Category: Palestine | Comments Off on Palestine and the UNs responsibility to protect doctrine – Al Jazeera English
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

More than 50 former foreign ministers, prime ministers and senior international officials, including two British Conservative former ministers, have signed an open letter condemning political interference in efforts by the international criminal court (ICC) to investigate alleged war crimes in Palestine.

The letter follows moves by the Trump administration to sanction court officials orders that have since been reversed by the Biden administration and is also seen as a rebuke of Boris Johnson, the British prime minister.

Johnson said last month that an ICC investigation opened in March gave the impression of being a partial and prejudicial attack on a friend and ally of the UKs, referring to Israel. The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has said that any ICC investigation would be pure antisemitism.

Condemning the increasing attacks on the ICC, its staff and cooperating civil society groups, the letter identifies the Trump administrations moves against the court as part of a wider trend.

We witnessed with serious concern the executive order issued in the United States by the former president Donald Trump and the sanctions designated against the courts staff and their family members, the letter says.

Deeply worrying is now the unwarranted public criticism of the court regarding its investigation of alleged crimes committed in the occupied Palestinian territory, including unfounded accusations of antisemitism.

It is well established and recognised that accountability for serious rights violations by all sides to a conflict is essential for achieving a sustainable and lasting peace. This is the case in Israel-Palestine, just as in Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan, Mali, Bangladesh/Myanmar, Colombia, and Ukraine.

Attempts to discredit the court and obstruct its work cannot be tolerated if we are serious about promoting and upholding justice globally, the signatories add while pushing back against complaints of the kind levelled by Johnson, which he made in a letter to the Conservative Friends of Israel.

We understand fears of politically motivated complaints and investigations. Yet we strongly believe that the Rome statute guarantees the highest criteria of justice and provides a crucial avenue to address impunity for the worlds most serious crimes. Failure to act would have grave consequences.

The ICCs investigation has also run into opposition from other European countries, including Germany, whose foreign minister, Heiko Maas, has said that the court has no jurisdiction because of the absence of the element of Palestinian statehood required by international law.

The signatories to the letter come from across Europes political spectrum, and include the Conservative former cabinet ministers Sayeeda Warsi and Chris Patten; Douglas Alexander, former Labour secretary of state for international development; Sir Menzies Campbell, former leader of the Liberal Democrat party; and Ben Bradshaw, a Labour former minister of state at the Foreign Office.

Among international signatories are a number of former prime ministers, including Jean-Marc Ayrault of France, Gro Harlem Brundtland of Norway, John Bruton of Ireland, Ingvar Carlsson of Sweden, and Massimo dAlema of Italy. Others who have signed the letter include the former Nato secretary general Javier Solana, and Hans Blix, former director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Defending the current investigation into alleged war crimes in Palestine, the Danish former foreign minister and former president of the UN general assembly, Mogens Lykketoft, told the Guardian: A rules-based global order is predicated upon the idea that violations of international law must be met with consequences.

The international criminal court is a crucial tool to that end, and it is incumbent upon us to protect its independence and strengthen its ability to work. Challenging the independence of the court, on the contrary, challenges the protection of a global rules-based order.

The current investigation of the international criminal court can be an important component of this, and the international community must do what it can to protect the independence of the court in carrying out its work.

While the letter does not mention Johnson by name, his intervention underlined concerns over attempts to hobble the ICCs investigation, which was formally announced earlier this year.

The Palestinian mission to the UK described Johnsons letter as a deeply regrettable contradiction of international law and previous British policy.

It marks a low point in UK-Palestine relations and undermines the UKs credibility on the international stage, it said. It is clear that the UK now believes Israel is above the law. There is no other interpretation of a statement that gives carte blanche to Israel.

See the article here:

Senior figures attack obstruction of ICCs Palestine investigation - The Guardian

Category: Palestine | Comments Off on Senior figures attack obstruction of ICCs Palestine investigation – The Guardian
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

Pent-up consumer demand, cheaper rents, and the sight of the proverbial light at the end of the tunnel coupled with the usual optimism are combining in mid-2021 for what is shaping up to be a restaurant boom in the Philadelphia area.

No matter that the labor situation is dire, and has stalled a good number of already planned restaurants from opening or expanding. Or the skyrocketing cost of building materials that promises to bust budgets. Or the wildly fluctuating commodity costs, which make menu planning and pricing dicey propositions.

Im counting more than 60 projects on the books some more fleshed-out than others that are being positioned to open this year. All are due in summer, unless noted otherwise, though a few are in their very earliest, soft-opening days.

Dobbs, the storied rock hall that enjoyed a run from 1975 to 1996 at 304 South St., is being revived as a music venue for all genres, with a sports bar upstairs. It could open this summer if city permitting goes smoothly.

Hook & Master (Second and Master Streets), a Jose Garces-run Chicago-style pizzeria.

La Chinesca (11th and Spring Garden Streets), a Mexico City Chinese-Mexican hybrid from Mike Pasquarello (Cafe Lift, Prohibition Taproom). Its due in mid-June.

Lark, specializing in coastal cuisine from chef Nicholas Elmi and business partner Fia Berisha, is on track at the Ironworks at Pencoyd Landing in Bala Cynwyd.

LMNO (1739 Frankford Ave., at Palmer Street), a Stephen Starr collab with New York scenester Serge Becker on entertainment and Baja Mexican cuisine.

Theres no name, but Michael Schulson and Jeff Michaud are opening at 13th and Sansom Streets, replacing Zavino with a spot specializing in Roman tonda wood-fired pizza, fresh pasta, plus salads and small plates from executive chef Ed Pinello.

Middle Child Clubhouse will be a grown-up version of the Washington Square West sandwich shop, at 1232 N. Front St. in Fishtown.

Victory Brewing Co.s vast brewpub is on track where the TGI Fridays was at 1776 Ben Franklin Parkway. A Federal Donuts will open behind it.

Ancient Spirits & Grille, in its first few days at 1726 Chestnut St., bills itself as the first herbal cocktail lounge in America, with Indian-inspired Ayurvedic-style cooking in a chic, low-lit setting.

Aroma on 3rd, from Tony Cardillo of Aroma at 1120 Pine St., will replace Caffe Valentino at Moyamensing Avenue and Wharton Street in Pennsport.

Bella Trattoria will partner chef Michael Falcone and David Backhus (Bloom and Oori) at 366 Ridge Rd. in Spring City.

Black Squirrel is coming June 9 from chef Art Cavaliere at 3749 Midvale Ave. in East Falls, quite a few steps up from predecessor Buckets.

The Borscht Belt will be a Jewish deli from Nick Liberato (Paramount Networks Bar Rescue, Netflixs Restaurants on the Edge) and partners inside the Stockton Market in Stockton, N.J.

Dolce Italian, a swish syndication from LDV Hospitality, is teed up for the new W Hotel on Chestnut Street near 15th.

Essie will see first-time restaurateurs Mike and Cherie Gillespie opening a bistro at 1 Garfield Ave. in Clementon, a sleek redo of J Walkers.

Farina Pasta & Noodle (132 S. 17th St.) will be a below-street-level pasta shop from Joe Liang and Daniel Lee.

Ferry & Main, under chef Greg Vassos (the late Racine and the Brick Farm Tavern), is coming to the Logan Inn in New Hope.

Urban Outfitters has just opened Gatehouse at the Navy Yard, where Bar Amis was, at the entrance to the Navy Yard (4503 S. Broad St.). Its a bar/restaurant with a beer garden.

Huff & Puff BBQ is in its first days of conventional and vegan barbecue at 246 S. 11th St. in Washington Square West.

READ MORE: Philly's best barbecue right now

Ikki Sushi will dispense rolls and drinks from a former nail salon at 310 Market St. in Old City.

Jennis Splendid Ice Creams has two locations teed up for Philly: 19th and Chestnut Streets in Center City and 1322 Frankford Ave. in Fishtown.

June BYOB, which shut down on East Passyunk Avenue in 2020, is looking to resurface at 690 Haddon Ave. in Collingswood. Timeline is TBA.

Little Susies, the Kensington pie, coffee, and soup shop, is fixing up the old passport photo shop at Second and Chestnut Streets in Old City.

Pierbar, a seafooder, is under construction at 2025 Fairmount Ave., where Hickory Lane was.

Pizza Plus will expand to West Philly, setting up at 4814 Spruce St.

READ MORE: Philly's best pizza right now

Rex 1516 at 1516 South St. will close soon, in anticipation of a move next door into the Royal Theater.

Sugar Factory American Brasserie is getting closer on its location in the former Zinburger at Garden State shopping center in Cherry Hill.

Top Tomato, the Walnut Street pizzeria, is fixing a takeover of the shuttered Smokin Bettys at 11th and Sansom Streets.

Van Leeuwens Ice Cream is headed to Philadelphia and a scoop shop at 13th and Sansom Streets, where Capogiro was.

The Yankee Chipper, specializing in fish and chips, is coming to 827 E. Pleasant Ave. in Wyndmoor.

Zacharys BBQ & Deli from chef Keith Taylor is taking shape at 9 W. Main St. in Norristown.

Read more here:

Starr, Schulson, and Garces are 3 of the big names opening new Philly-area restaurants in summer 2021 - The Philadelphia Inquirer

Category: Jewish Cuisine | Comments Off on Starr, Schulson, and Garces are 3 of the big names opening new Philly-area restaurants in summer 2021 – The Philadelphia Inquirer
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 7, 2021

With help from Allie Bice and Daniel Payne

Welcome to POLITICOs West Wing Playbook, your guide to the people and power centers in the Biden administration. Did someone forward this to you? Subscribe here! Have a tip? Email us at [emailprotected].

When Secretary of State ANTONY BLINKEN has traveled the globe to meet his counterparts from countries like Russia, India, Japan, South Korea and Canada, the seat next to him has been occupied by a quiet 40-ish-year-old Yale graduate with a fair complexion and a seemingly constant case of bed head.

At a certain angle, the senior Blinken aide could have been mistaken for the presidents national security adviser JAKE SULLIVAN. And for good reason. The aide is Jakes little brother, TOM SULLIVAN, who serves as deputy chief of staff for policy at the State Department (the same position he held at the end of the Obama administration).

The Sullivan family has become its own small web of power in the Biden administration. Besides Jake and Toms prominent roles, both of their spouses have senior positions at the Health and Human Services Department and the Justice Department, respectively.

Jakes wife, MAGGIE GOODLANDER, clerked for Supreme Court Justice STEPHEN BREYER and Judge MERRICK GARLAND before becoming counsel to Garland in the attorney generals office.

And ROSE SULLIVAN, who worked with Tom in Sen. AMY KLOBUCHARs office, is the principal deputy assistant secretary for legislation at HHS after a stint lobbying for companies like Google/Alphabet, Airbnb, CVS Health and Teva Pharmaceutical Industries. (Her old lobbying firm KDCR Partners amended several disclosure filings in March to clarify she did not lobby HHS, which would have prevented her from taking the job under Bidens ethics rules.)

Tom also did a tour in the private sector during the Trump administration. He became the quasi-chief of staff for the international public policy team at Amazon under Obama administration alum DAVID ROTH and worked closely with SUSAN POINTER, Amazons vice president of international public policy and government affairs.

Former colleagues describe Tom as the ultimate D.C. staffer: competent, low-drama, press-shy, and gives one helluva briefing. He has an M.A. in international affairs from the University of Chicago and has worked under establishment luminaries like the late LES GELB, the former State and Defense department official who collaborated with Biden on issues like the Iraq war (the two were prominent champions of partitioning the country into three).

When Gelb was the president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, Tom worked for him as a research associate from 2003 to 2005, according to an archived State Department biography from the Obama administration.

In keeping with his reputation, Tom declined to comment through a State Department spokesperson. The department declined our requests to speak with Toms colleagues. They also didnt respond to requests to confirm his age. Hes so low-profile that his Legistorm profile has a picture of the wrong Tom Sullivan.

Tom, his wife, and Jake all come from Klobuchar-world. Tom, Jake and Rose are all Minnesota natives; Tom and Jakes father, DAN SULLIVAN, worked with Klobuchars father, the columnist JIM KLOBUCHAR, at the Star Tribune. At various points from 2007 to 2015, Jake was the senators chief counsel, Tom was her deputy chief of staff, and Rose served as her chief of staff.

At the outset of her presidential campaign in 2019, a number of news outlets published accounts by former staffers who alleged Klobuchar was an abusive boss. All three Sullivans signed a supportive open letter in response. We remain grateful for our time in Senator Klobuchars office and still consider Amy a mentor and friend, the letter from former Klobuchar staffers read. Sadly, this was not fully conveyed in the recent news reports.

The feeling appears to be mutual, as Klobuchar told us in an interview that she counts herself a huge Tom Sullivan fan.

Tom worked on Klobuchars 2006 Senate campaign in an extremely glamorous role driving the van behind the campaign bus in case it broke down, setting up chairs, etc. but he did it with aplomb, the senator recalled. After both Sullivans eventually followed Klobuchar to D.C., Tom became more interested in foreign affairs and accompanied her on many of her trips overseas. I guess I trained him for the Tony Blinken trips, she said.

The senator remembers one long Asia trip that included Republican Sens. JOHN McCAIN (Ariz.) and LINDSEY GRAHAM (S.C.). McCain often insisted on everyone eating together and was struck by how Sullivan, even in foreign locales, somehow stuck to Midwestern cuisine. Tom would always order the most Minnesota-type food, and McCain was always giving him grief, she said. You can have this, theyd have weird, who knows what, sushi and Tom would always be ordering, Ill have chicken and rice every time.

The quirky diet was a sign of character, she said.

To me it was just another example of his steadiness and just kind of the no-drama, does the work and does it for all the right reasons, Klobuchar said. He would always be able to get every answer throughout his time working for me in the Senate.

Do you work in the Biden administration? Are you in touch with the White House? Are you RACHEL CHIU?

We want to hear from you and well keep you anonymous: [emailprotected]. Or if you want to stay really anonymous send us a tip through SecureDrop, Signal, Telegram, or Whatsapp here. You can also reach Alex and Theo individually.

A message from Citizens' Climate Lobby:

Carbon pricing will make America a clean energy leader. Putting a price on carbon will incentivize innovation, transform our economy and create millions of jobs. Learn more.

With the Partnership for Public Service

How many presidential memorials and monuments are on the National Mall?

(Answer at the bottom.)

EVERYTHING GOES WELL WITH DOUGHNUTS White House press secretary JEN PSAKI doesnt think you should chase your doughnut with a beer. While detailing the glut of promotions that governments, colleges and companies are offering to encourage people to get vaccinated, she noted that Anheuser-Busch even promised a free round if the country hit the Independence Day target of inoculating 70 percent of adults from Covid-19.

Weve seen Krispy Kreme has done this, Psaki said, referencing the doughnut purveyors much-discussed giveaway. I would not recommend a Krispy Kreme with a beer, but Ill leave that to other people to decide. (Wed be remiss not to note there is an entire subgenre of craft beer that mashes up sweets and suds.)

Its all part of the White Houses national month of action that will also include vaccinations at Black-owned barbershops and beauty salons, free babysitting from several of the largest child-care providers, and other enticements. White House chief of staff RON KLAIN seemed especially keen on the free beer, however, judging by his hyperactive Twitter feed.

As for Bidens goal? Its within reach, as roughly 63 percent of adults have gotten at least their first dose of the Covid-19 vaccine thus far. From NICK NIEDZWIADEK

BIDENS TEMPORARY AMBASSADORS Its starting to look like a trend: The Biden administration is dispatching experienced diplomats to lead embassies on a temporary basis, NAHAL TOOSI tells us.

Theyre called chargs daffaires, and Biden has named at least four of them in the past five weeks to head the U.S. embassies in India, El Salvador, Qatar and Canada. Their selection suggests that the administration believes it will be some time many months, maybe before Senate-confirmed ambassadors can assume certain posts.

To be clear, dozens of embassies are currently led by chargs daffaires. Thats what you call whoever is left in charge when the ambassador is away. And President DONALD TRUMPs unusually large number of politically appointed ambassadors meant that an unusually large number of embassies lost their leaders once Trump left office.

Whats striking about Bidens new chargs daffaires is that theyre coming from outside the embassies theyre leading.

Take India. Biden considers India a critical partner in its faceoff with China and has pledged to help New Delhi tackle its Covid-19 crisis. As a result, his administration named DANIEL SMITH, a top diplomat who recently served as acting secretary of State, as the charg daffaires.

Asked for comment, a State Department spokesperson insisted that its common practice.

During times of transition the department sometimes chooses to leverage its deep bench of experienced career professionals to provisionally support diplomats on the ground and help the secretary accomplish the work of the American people, the spokesperson said.

SWEARING-IN OPTICS: A number of Biden officials have been creative with the books they swear-in on. Deputy Commerce Secretary DON GRAVES used a copy of the 13th Amendment gifted to his family by abolitionist Sen. CHARLES SUMNER. Vice President KAMALA HARRIS placed her hand on a Bible that THURGOOD MARSHALL, the first Black Supreme Court justice, once owned.

On Wednesday ERIC LANDER, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, was sworn in on a 500-year-old 13-page fragment of the first edition of the Mishnah ever created on a printing press, which he found while perusing the Library of Congress archives for swearing-in material, according to his office. A Jewish printer in the Kingdom of Naples operated the press.

REPARATIONS MUST WAIT Biden met with members of the Congressional Black Caucus after his speech marking the 100th anniversary of the Tulsa Race Massacre Tuesday, and told them he was not pushing for a commission on reparations right now, despite supporting the idea during the 2020 campaign, EUGENE DANIELS reports.

He didnt disagree with what we're doing, Rep. BRENDA LAWRENCE (D-Mich.), the CBCs second vice chair, told Eugene. He did talk about his plate [being] full with trying to get the infrastructure bill passed and that he really wanted to make sure that he could get that through before he took on anything else.

How Native Americans see Deb Haaland (NYTs Elizabeth Williamson)

A conversation with NIHs Francis Collins (The Atlantics Peter Wehner)

The conservative publishing industry has a Joe Biden problem (The Atlantics McKay Coppins)

Stimulus checks substantially reduced hardship, study shows (NYTs Jason DeParle)

Billionaires are racing to sidestep Bidens plan to raise their taxes (Voxs Theodore Schleifer)

Science chief wants next pandemic vaccine ready in 100 days (APs Seth Borenstein)

He delivered remarks regarding the pandemic and vaccination progress at the South Court Auditorium. Later, he met with Sen. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO (R-W.Va.) to talk about bipartisan infrastructure negotiations. They're set to speak again on Friday.

He and first lady JILL BIDEN traveled to Rehoboth Beach, Del., for the evening. (FYI, it's Jill's bday tomorrow).

She swore in Lander to be the director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy in the vice presidents ceremonial office.

Eric Lander and his family | Courtesy of the office of Office of Science and Technology Policy

OSTP sent along this photo of Lander and his family with Library of Congress specialist ANN BRENER (who discovered and catalogued the 500-year-old text) viewing the text in person for the first time.

TIM WU, a member on Bidens National Economic Council, coined the term net neutrality back in 2003, defining the phrase in a paper entitled, Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination.

And back in 2016, he tried to explain the concept to late night show host STEPHEN COLBERT while riding a rollercoaster.

While almost out of breath from the intensity of the Nitro roller coaster at Six Flags, Wu explained it as the idea that all traffic on the Internet should be treated the same.

But despite Wus best efforts, Colbert still didnt quite grasp the concept.

When the ride was over, he asked: As far as I could tell, net neutrality means that I should be neutral about the net. I shouldnt take sides, right?

Not quite, Wu said, stifling a laugh.

The full clip is worth the watch.

Weve previously reported on Wus hot takes regarding the best hot springs, fruits, airports and more. What about rollercoasters, Tim?

HELP US OUT Do you have a story thats potentially embarrassing but not too mean or serious you think we should use for an "Oppo Book" item? Email us: [emailprotected]

Six Washington Monument, Thomas Jefferson Memorial, Lincoln Memorial, Ulysses S. Grant Memorial, Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial and the Dwight D. Eisenhower Memorial.

We want your tips, but we also want your feedback as we transition to West Wing Playbook. What should we be covering in this newsletter that were not? What are we getting wrong? Please let us know.

Edited by Emily Cadei

A message from Citizens' Climate Lobby:

Climate change is at our doorstep. Its time to reduce Americas carbon pollution quickly. Putting a price on carbon is the single most powerful tool we have to combat climate change. Learn how carbon pricing:

Puts Americans back to work.

Produces tangible results in the first year, with a 50% reduction in Americas carbon pollution by 2030.

Is backed by a broad coalition of Americans, including economists, scientists, and business leaders.

Gives a monthly cash payment to American families.

Here is the original post:

For the Sullivans, the Biden administration is a family affair - Politico

Category: Jewish Cuisine | Comments Off on For the Sullivans, the Biden administration is a family affair – Politico
Tags:

Posted By admin on June 5, 2021

Judaism began about 4000 years ago with the Hebrew people in the Middle East. Abraham, a Hebrew man, is considered the father of the Jewish faith because he promoted the central idea of the Jewish faith: that there is one God. At the time many people in the Middle East worshipped many gods. It is said that Abraham and his wife Sarah, who were old and childless, were told by God that their children would be as plentiful as the stars in the sky and that they would live in a land of their own -- the Promised Land. This gradually came true.

Abraham's son, Isaac had a son, Jacob, also called Israel. In this way the descendants of Abraham came to be known as the Israelites. God promised the Israelites he would care for them as long as they obeyed God's laws. While still traveling, the Hebrews lived in Egypt where they were enslaved. Moses, a Hebrew, was chosen by God to lead the Hebrew people out of Egypt. Moses led the Hebrew people out of the Sinai Desert toward the promised land. At Mt. Sinai, God gave Moses the Law which would guide the Israelites to today. The laws were called the Ten Commandments and form the basis of the Torah, the book of Jewish law.

It took many years for the Israelites to finally get to what they thought was the Promised Land - Canaan. After some fighting the Jews established the Israelite kingdom. After many years, Canaan was conquered by the Assyrians, the Babylonians and then eventually the Romans. The Israelites once again found themselves enslaved, this time by Babylonians. The Israelites were then taken over by Romans who destroyed much of what had been built in Jerusalem by the Israelites. Most of the Jews were scattered all over the region and eventually moved from place to place to avoid persecution which continues to this day. The dispersion of the Jews is called the Diaspora.

The worst persecution of the Jews was during World War II by the Nazis who murdered more than six million Jews or a third of the world's Jewish population. This was called the Holocaust. Beginning in the 1880's Jews began returning to their homeland in growing numbers, this time to avoid persecution where they lived. After World War II, many Jews believed that for the Jewish people and culture to survive, Jews needed to live in their own country where all Jews from anywhere in the world would have the right to live and be citizens. In 1948, Palestine was divided up and a Jewish state of Israel was formed in the land that was once called Canaan, surrounded by countries with predominantly Muslim populations. Since Muslims also claimed rights to the land where the Jews were living, there was conflict, which continues to this day in the Middle East.

Today nearly fourteen million Jewish people live all over the world. Approximately half of them live in the United States, one quarter live in Israel, and a quarter are still scattered around the world in countries in Europe, Russia, South America, Africa, Asia and other North American and Middle Eastern countries. Anyone born to a Jewish mother is considered a Jew.

Jewish people believe in the Torah, which was the whole of the laws given to the Israelities at Sinai. They believe they must follow God's laws which govern daily life. Later legal books, written by rabbis, determine the law as it applies to life in each new place and time.

Orthodox Jews believe that all of the practices in the Torah which it is practical to obey must be obeyed without question.

Conservative and Reform Jews believe that the ancient laws and practices have to be interpreted for modern life with inclusion of contemporary sources and with more concern with community practices than with ritual practices.

Reform Jews also allow everyone to sit together, men and women, and both Hebrew and the local language are spoken in services.

The Tenakh is the ancient collection of writings that are sacred to the Jews. They were written over almost a thousand years from 1000 to 100 BCE. The word Tenakh comes from the three first letters of the three books included in this text: the Torah, plus the Nev'im (prophets) and the Ki'tuvim (writings, which include histories, prophecies, poems, hymns and sayings).

The Torah is written on scrolls and kept in a special cabinet called the aron hakodish, the holy ark, in synagogues. The Torah is read with a pointer called a yad (hand) to keep it from being spoiled. Each week, one section is read until the entire Torah is completed and the reading begins again.

The Talmud is also an important collection of Jewish writings. Written about 2000 years ago, it is a recording of the rabbis' discussion of the way to follow the Torah at that time. Later texts, the Mishnah Torah and the Shulhan Aruch, are recordings of rabbinic discussions from later periods.

Continued here:

Judaism: Basic Beliefs | URI

Category: Judaism | Comments Off on Judaism: Basic Beliefs | URI
Tags: